Amanpreet Kaur, M. Bedi, Parvinder Singh, Pulkita Lamba, Harbhajan Kaur, Vijay Suri
{"title":"Comparison of chromohysteroscopy findings with histopathological findings in abnormal uterine bleeding","authors":"Amanpreet Kaur, M. Bedi, Parvinder Singh, Pulkita Lamba, Harbhajan Kaur, Vijay Suri","doi":"10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20240782","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Aim was to compare histological diagnosis of differently stained endometrial tissue on chromohysteroscopy.\nMethods: A total of 80 patients diagnosed with AUB and satisfying the study design were included in the study. Hysteroscopy followed by chromohysteroscopy was done using 1% methylene blue. Staining patterns were observed and guided biopsies were taken from differently stained areas and sent for histopathology.\nResults: On chromohysteroscopy, out of the 80 participants, 53 (66.3%) had focal staining and 27 (33.7%) had diffuse staining. The overall sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of TVS in diagnosing uterine abnormalities was 51.7%, 45.1%, 34.9%, 62.2% respectively. The overall sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for hysteroscopy were 96.6%, 41.2%, 48.3%, 95.5% respectively. The indices for chromohysteroscopy were as follows: sensitivity-69% for focal and 31% for diffuse staining, specificity-49.0% for focal staining and 69.7% for diffuse staining, PPV-43.5% for focal and 33.3% for diffuse staining, NPV-73.5% for focal staining and 62.3% for diffuse staining.\nConclusions: The idea of staining of endometrium and taking a guided biopsy is exciting and is undoubtedly, better than a blind sampling. However, subjecting all the patient of AUB to chromohysteroscopy in order to find a major histopathological difference is questionable and needs larger trials to reach to concrete decision.","PeriodicalId":14225,"journal":{"name":"International journal of reproduction, contraception, obstetrics and gynecology","volume":"55 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of reproduction, contraception, obstetrics and gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20240782","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Aim was to compare histological diagnosis of differently stained endometrial tissue on chromohysteroscopy.
Methods: A total of 80 patients diagnosed with AUB and satisfying the study design were included in the study. Hysteroscopy followed by chromohysteroscopy was done using 1% methylene blue. Staining patterns were observed and guided biopsies were taken from differently stained areas and sent for histopathology.
Results: On chromohysteroscopy, out of the 80 participants, 53 (66.3%) had focal staining and 27 (33.7%) had diffuse staining. The overall sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of TVS in diagnosing uterine abnormalities was 51.7%, 45.1%, 34.9%, 62.2% respectively. The overall sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for hysteroscopy were 96.6%, 41.2%, 48.3%, 95.5% respectively. The indices for chromohysteroscopy were as follows: sensitivity-69% for focal and 31% for diffuse staining, specificity-49.0% for focal staining and 69.7% for diffuse staining, PPV-43.5% for focal and 33.3% for diffuse staining, NPV-73.5% for focal staining and 62.3% for diffuse staining.
Conclusions: The idea of staining of endometrium and taking a guided biopsy is exciting and is undoubtedly, better than a blind sampling. However, subjecting all the patient of AUB to chromohysteroscopy in order to find a major histopathological difference is questionable and needs larger trials to reach to concrete decision.